Sportbikes are not beginner bikes
 

First posted at beginnerbikes.com (which is no longer), reportedly by a Matt Pickering:

Form Equals Function: Sportbikes are Not Beginner Bikes

Introduction

Well, another riding season is upon us and as it always happens, we get lots of inquiries from potential new riders on how to get into the sport, what's a good first ride, where to take safety classes and so on. One particular type of inquiry that pops up with almost clockwork frequency is from a small number of new riders who wish to buy 600cc and up sportbikes as their first ride.

For the past year and a half, I, along with lots of other BB forum members, have entertained this question of 600cc sportbikes for a first ride with patience and lots and lots of repetition. It seems this small group of newbies keep coming back with the same arguments and questions over and over again. As a result, I am going to take the time in this column to try and put into words, answers that get repeated over and over on the BB forums.

Allow me to state first and foremost that I am a sport rider. My first bike was a Ninja 250R and I put nearly 7000 miles on it in two seasons before selling it. I am presently shopping for my next ride and it will almost certainly be a sportbike or sport tourer in the 600-1000cc range. I am also building a track bike in my garage which I hope to complete this season (a Yamaha FZR600). Although I am not an expert rider by any stretch, I have tinkered enough and done enough research along with talking with other riders to be able to speak with some degree of knowledge on the subject.

This column is split into two parts. First, I would like to address the common arguments we see here as to why a 600cc sportbike simply must be a first ride along with rebuttals. Second, I want to cover the rationale behind why the BB community-at-large steers new riders away from these machines.

False Logic

On about a three month interval, a whole slew of questions pop up on the BB forum from potential riders trying to convince the community that a 600cc sportbike is a suitable first ride and then proceed to explain to us why they are the exception. I can almost set my clock to this pattern of behavior since it is almost swarm-like. I guess the newbies figure by swamping the forum with the same questions in lots of places we might trip up and endorse such a machine. Hasn't happened yet but they keep on trying.

For those of you that come to Beginner Bikes trying to convince us to endorse a 600cc sportbike, I offer you the following responses to your arguments.
I can only afford to get one bike so it might as be the one that I want.

I don't want to go through the hassle of buying and selling a used bike to learn on.

These two lines of reasoning pop up as one of the more common arguments. I am going to offer first a piece of wisdom which is stated with great regularity on the forums:

This is your first bike, not your last.

Motorcycle riders are reputed to change bikes, on average, once every two to three years. If this is the case (and it appears to be based on my observations), the bike you learn to ride on will not be in your garage in a few years time anyway whether you buy it new or used. You're going to sell it regardless to get something different, newer, more powerful, more comfortable, etc.

Yes, buying a bike involves effort and a financial outlay. Most of us simply cannot afford to drop thousands of dollars on a whim every time we want to try something new. Getting into riding is a serious commitment in time and money and we want the best value out it as much as possible.

However, if you can afford to buy outright or finance a 600cc or up sportbike that costs $7000 on average, you can probably afford to spend $2000 or so on a used bike to learn on. Most of the beginner sportbikes we recommend here (Ninja 250/500, Buell Blast, GS500) can all be found used for between $1500-$3000.

Done properly, buying and selling that first bike is a fairly painless process. Buying a used bike is no harder than buying new. I would argue it is a bit easier. No different than buying a used car from a private seller. If you've done that at least once, you'll know what to do in buying a used bike.

Selling a beginner bike is even easier. You want to know why? Because beginner bikes are constantly in demand (especially Ninja 250s). These bikes spend their lives migrating from one new rider to the next to act as a teaching vehicle. It is not uncommon for a beginner bike to see four or five different owners before it is wrecked or junked. There are a lot of people out there looking for inexpensive, reliable bikes and all of our beginner recommendations fit into that category.

If you buy a used Ninja 250R for $1500, ride it for a season or two, you can be almost guaranteed that you will be able to resell that bike for $1300 or so when you are done with it provided you take care of it. And on a bike like the Ninja 250R, the average turnaround on such a sale is two to three days. No joke. I had five offers on my Ninja 250R within FOUR HOURS of my ad going up on Cycle Trader. I put the bike on hold the same day and sold it four days later to a fellow who drove 500 miles to pick it up. My bike never made it into the print edition. Believe me, the demand is there.

And look at it this way: For those one or two seasons of riding using the above example, excluding maintenance costs which you have no matter what, you will have paid a net cost of $200 to ride that Ninja. That is extremely cheap for what is basically a bike rental for a year or two. Considering it can cost $300 or more just to rent a 600cc sportbike for a weekend (not including the $1500-$2000 security deposit), that is economic value that you simply cannot argue with.

Vanity Arguments

The beginner bikes you recommend are dated and ugly looking.

I want something that's modern and stylish.

I want a bike that looks good and that I look good on.

I call these the vanity arguments. These are probably the worst reasons you can have for wanting a particular bike.

I will not disagree that aesthetics plays a huge part in the bikes that appeal to us. Motorcycles are the ultimate expression in personal taste in vehicles. Far more than cars. Bikes are more personal and the connection between rider and machine is far more intimate on a bike than a car. On a bike, you are part of the machine, not just a passive passenger.

However, as entry into world of riding and with the temporarily status that most beginner bikes have in our garages, looks should be the least of your concerns. As long as the bike is in good repair and mechanically sound, that is usually enough for most new riders to be happy. Most riders are happy to ride and they will ride anything given the choice between riding or not riding.

If you are looking at bike mainly because of how it looks and/or how you will look it and how others will perceive you on it, take a good, long, honest look as to why you want to ride. There are lots of people out there who buy things strictly because of how it makes them appear in the eyes of others. It's shallow and vain but it is a fact of life. It shouldn't be a factor in choosing that first ride but it is. I won't deny that.

The difference is: a BMW or Mercedes generally won't leaving you hanging on for dear life if you stomp on the accelerator or throw you into the road if you slam on the brakes a little hard. Virtually ever sportbike made in the past 10-15 years will do both of those things given a chance to do so (for reasons that will be explained later in this column).

The population at large may think you're cool and look great on that brand new sportbike and ohh-and-ahh at you. The ohhs can quickly turn to screams of horror should, in your efforts to impress the masses, you wind up dumping your bike and surfing the asphalt. Will you still look cool with thousands of dollars in damage to that once-beautiful sportbike and with the signatures and well-wishes of your friends on the various casts you'll be wearing months afterwards?

You Be The Judge

I'm a big rider so I need a bigger bike to get me around.

I'm a tall rider and all of those beginner bikes just don't fit me the way the sportbike does.

I'll look huge and foolish riding on such a small bike.

My friends will laugh at me for riding something so small.

These arguments are almost as bad as the vanity arguments. The difference being is they simply show a lack of motorcycle knowledge for the most part.

Unless you are over 6'3" tall or are extremely overweight (meaning well over 300lbs), even the smallest 250cc motorcycle will be able to accommodate you without difficultly. To provide an example, the Ninja 250R has a load limit of 348 pounds. That is more than sufficient to accommodate a heavier rider in full gear and still leave plenty of space for cargo in tank, tail and saddle bags. Or enough to allow two-up riding between two average weight individuals.

The idea that bigger riders need bigger bikes is almost laughable. It's like saying small drivers need Honda Civics but bigger drivers only 100 pounds heavier need to drive Hummers to get around. Or Corvettes with plenty of power to pull their ample frames, as the analogy goes. It is only because of the small physical size of bikes compared to their users that this train of thought even exists. It simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny. A look at any motorcycle owner's manual will confirm that for you.

Tall riders suffer more from fit issues than weight issues. On this, they do have a point. I'm a taller rider (6'1"). I do fold up quite comfortably on the Ninja 250 which is considered a small bike. I found it perfect for my frame. Others haven't. Then again, my knees hit the bars on bikes like the Rebel 250 and Buell Blast. Just different ergonomics that didn't fit me.

For taller riders, a much better beginner fit is a dual-sport machine rather than a sport machine. They offer the high seat heights that make them comfortable rides and their power is well within acceptable limits. We have a small but vocal dual-sport community here and they will tell you, quite rightly, that a dual-sport is just as capable on twisty roads as a sportbike. The same properties that give sportbikes their cornering ability is also possessed by dual sports (high center of gravity).

As to peer pressure, I admit to taking more than my fair share of ribbing from my 600cc riding friends. Some of it good natured, some of it not. In the end, this argument falls into the vanity arena. Which is more important: Your safety and comfort on a bike or what your friends think?

The ways to deal with friends giving you a hard time about a smaller ride is very simple. Tell them to ride their rides and you'll ride yours. It's your ride, after all. Most true riders will accept other riders, no matter what they are on. Only posers and losers care that your ride doesn't measure up to their "standards". And if so, do you really want to be riding with them anyway? It's more fun to stand out than to be a member of a flock anyway. And if they don't buy that line of reasoning, try this one: "Well if you don't like my ride, why don't you go buy me something that you will like?". THAT will shut them up REALLY fast. It works too. Unless their name is on the payment book or the title, it shouldn't be their concern.

If your friends can't deal with your decisions, you're probably better off looking for new friends. And if you can't deal with the peer pressure, then you are putting your own safety at risk solely because of what others think. Revisit the vanity arguments above and think about why you want to ride.


Decision Justification Arguments

I'll take it easy and grow into the bike.

I'm a careful driver so I'll be a careful rider and not get into trouble.

I drive a fast car so I'll be able to handle a fast bike.

Other people have started on a 600cc sportbike and didn't get hurt. So why can't I?

These arguments are the most common ones put forth and the ones that are hardest to deal with. These are the arguments that start flame wars. Because it is on these arguments that you have to convince someone the idea of what a beginner bike is over their preconceived notions.

The arguments also often surface in what I call the "decision justification arguments". Many new riders have their heart set on a specific bike and often come to BB to ask about it not to get real advice but to get confirmation that their decision is right. In cruisers, standards, scooters and dual-sports, more often than not these "pre-decisions" are generally good ones. In sportbikes, more than 3/4 of the posters are trying to get the community to approve their choice of a 600cc machine as a first ride. Their shock is quite real when they are barraged with answers that don't meet their expectations and that is when a flurry of oft-repeated discussion ensues.

Let's take each argument in turn since these are the ones that turn up with regularity.

I'll take it easy and grow into the bike.

The purpose of a first bike is to allow you to master basic riding skills, build confidence and develop street survival strategies. You don't grow into a bike. You develop your skills on it. As your skills develop, so does your confidence and with it, your willingness to explore what the bike is capable of.

But you are also entering in a contract with the bike. It is two-way. You are going to expect the bike to act on your inputs and the bike in turn is going to respond. The problem is, your skills are still developing but the bike doesn't know that. It does what it is told. You want a partner in a contract to treat you fairly. On a bike, you don't want it fighting you every step of the way. And like most contracts, the problems don't start until there is a breakdown in communication or a misunderstanding.

In sportbikes, the disparity between a new rider's fledgling skills and the responsiveness of the machine are very far apart. That is a wide gulf to bridge when you are still trying to figure out what the best inputs and actions on the bike should be. Ideally, you want your bike to do what you tell it and do it nicely. You never want the bike to argue with you. Modern sportbikes, despite their exquisite handling will often argue violently right at the moment a new rider doesn't need them to.

Remember, riding is a LEARNED skill. It does not come naturally to the majority of us (save those like the Hayden brothers who were raised on dirt bikes from the moment they could walk). It must be practiced and refined. Riding is counter-intuitive to most new riders. It doesn't happen the way you expect. For example, at speeds over 25mph, to get a bike to go right, you actually turn the bars to the left. It's called counter-steering and it eventually comes naturally as breathing once you've been in the saddle for a while. But for new riders, this kind of thing is utterly baffling.

You want your skills to grow in a measurable and predictable fashion. You have enough to be fearful of riding in traffic. The last thing you need is to be fearful of what your bike might do when you aren't ready for it. It's never a good situation.

It is interesting to point out that only one manufacturer, Suzuki, explicitly states in their promotional material that their GSX-R family of sportbikes are intended for experienced riders. This also applies to several of their larger, more powerful machines (such as a GSX-1300R Hayabusa). If Suzuki issues such a warning for its top-flight sport machines, it is reasonable to say that the same warning would apply equally to similar machines from other manufacturers.

Form Equals Function: Part Two

In Part One of this article, we covered a lot of the excuses that new riders give for wanting to start on a 600cc sportbike. This second half finishes off our discussion of this reasoning and discusses why high-powered sport machines are not the ideal beginner machine.

False Logic Completed

Last month, we covered many of the reasons new riders give to justify why they want or should get a 600cc sportbike. Now we finish with the last and most common excuses given.
I'm a careful driver so I'll be a careful rider and not get into trouble.

This is what I call the "I'm responsible and mature" argument. This one is a general excuse and does not apply to sportbikes in particular.

Recent studies have shown that 90% of all drivers feel that they have average to above-driving abilities compared to other drivers on the road. These drivers also said that they think 60% of those on the road are less skilled than they are. It's an interesting perception as it indicates a mentality that everyone else is sub-par, not you. Obviously someone has to be wrong because the percentages just don't add up.

A proper attitude towards driving as well as riding is essential. But these same drivers who see themselves as superior also engage in dangerous driving habits (aggressive weaving, illegal passing, bad merges, following too close, lack of attention to traffic/road conditions, etc). Very few drivers are truly honest with themselves and their ability to handle a vehicle.

The problem is, on a bike, the perception that you are responsible is not enough. On a bike, you must be. You either learn to be or you are going to be in trouble really quick. In talking with other riders I have found that they tend to be much more defensive and thoughtful drivers behind the wheel because riding raises their perception of their surroundings.

Ultimately, responsible and mature does not equate to riding skill. It has nothing to do with it except how you will approach riding in general. You want to know the sign of a responsible rider? Look at their gear. Are they in full safety gear? Watch them ride. If you are seeing them turn their heads to clear their blind spots, making careful and smooth maneuvers, leaving a nice, safe amount space around them and working to maximize your chance of seeing and knowing what they are doing, then you are looking at a responsible rider.

Now do the same exercise and watch the drivers around you. How many turn their heads to check their blind spots, signal lane changes, leaving several car lengths of space in front of them, weave in and out of traffic or dash to the end of a ramp and then attempt to force themselves onto the highway rather than yield like they are supposed to? I'm willing to bet it's not going to be a pretty significant percentage. Now imagine these same individuals on a bike. I'm sure you'll be able to spot more than a few of these types on bikes to (just look for the T-shirts and flip-flops as they blast by you at 100mph on the Interstate on the right).

How you approach the task of driving is how you will approach riding. Attention to the task of riding is the number one way you avoid trouble by not getting into it in the first place. Study your own driving habits. Good habits will definitely keep your chances of getting into trouble but they have little to do with controlling a motorcycle. Any motorcycle. Many lax drivers often become much better drivers as the result of riding a motorcycle. It is far less common for it to go in the other direction.

I drive a fast car so I'll be able to handle a fast bike.

Of all the excuses and justifications, this one is my personal favorite. It is in the top three most common excuses given and it shows a complete and utter lack of motorcycle knowledge. It is a statement made out of naivety rather than ignorance.

Most of the folks who make this statement own fast cars (Corvette, Mustang, Acura, modified Civic, etc) or think they do. The belief is that if you can drive fast in a car you can handle a bike that can go fast. I would argue unless these folks race cars on weekends, driving a car that can go fast does not make them a experienced high-speed driver. And for those that do understand how to handle a car at high speed, it gives you knowledge of braking and traction but even that knowledge is useless for one simple reason:

Bikes are not cars.

Braking, traction control, acceleration and handling are totally different on a motorcycle. Cars do not lean. Bikes do. When bikes lean, it changes the part of the tire contacting the ground (the contact patch/ring) and changes the stability and dynamics of the bike from moment to moment. The physics of motorcycle control are in a league of their own. Even the ability to race cars will not give you instant godhood on a motorcycle.

Are you aware that a racing motorcycle (any 600cc supersport made today basically) when it is turning is touching the ground with an amount of rubber equal to a couple of postage stamps? The same applies to any street bike at deep lean angles except they don't have the advantage of a smooth surface to hold on to or sticky race tires. Now imagine having to control the power and the amount of traction you are getting in that space.

Like being responsible, the ability to handle a car at high speed has nothing to do with handling a fast motorcycle. You are missing two wheels, a cage and a seatbelt on a bike. Turning at 70mph becomes a whole different world on a motorcycle compared to car. Braking is a different experience too. It is fairly hard to stand a car on its front fender if you stomp on the brakes. It can be done with two fingers, a good amount of speed and a moment of panic on a sportbike. The only cars that have brakes equal or better than that of a sportbike built in the last 10 years is a Formula One race car.

The skills to handle the potent combination of acceleration, instant-on power and brakes are best learned on a smaller machine so when you finally get on that ultimate sportbike, you have an idea of what to do and how to handle the machine. Driving a car won't give you that. Only time in the saddle, the more, the better.

Other people have started on a 600cc sportbike and didn't get hurt. So why can't I?

This is probably the number one reason that pops up. However, it isn't so much a reason as an observation. And it is a true one. Every year, lots of new riders go to their local dealerships or scour their local ads and bring home a brand new or used 600cc sportbike. And many of those riders do successfully manage to get through their learning process on these machines.

The purpose of a first ride more than any other is to get the risk of riding for the first year or two as low as possible. You want your margin of forgiveness in the bike to be as wide as possible. A 600cc sportbike gives you very little of that. Yes, a 600cc down low is a tame if sensitive machine. However, it takes very little twist on the throttle to induce a large jump in rpm's. A brief bump on a pothole with a death grip on the throttle can introduce a 4000rpm jump in the blink of an eye (speaking from personal experience). In an experienced rider's hands, this is alarming but recoverable. A gentle rolloff or a little clutch feathering manages the surge nicely. In the hands of a newbie trying to figure out the best reaction to such a scare, a rapid closeoff or a panic brake is often the result and can get you into trouble very, very quickly.

Yes, a new rider can start on a 600cc sportbike. It is NOT RECOMMENDED! The reason this line of reasoning pops up so often is because everyone feels they are the exception rather than just another new rider. It makes sense. It's hard to think of oneself as just another face in the crowd. As a rider, I know I am just another average rider. Although I have track aspirations, I have no doubt as to where my skill level is and it is definitely not in (or ever was) in the "start on a 600cc exceptional group".

In the end, to deal with this line of reasoning is going to involve the new rider, not the one giving the advice. No one can stop that person from going out and buying a 600cc sportbike as a first ride. And maybe they will succeed and crow about all the bad advice they received on starting small. Great! They were the exception.

What you don't hear about are the non-exceptional people. Very, very few new riders who start on 600s come back to talk about their experiences if they aren't in the "I've had no problems." group. On the forums recently, there have been a couple folks who admitted they got 600cc sportbikes to start on and indicated that it had been a less-than-ideal choice. This type of honesty is refreshing and it is very, very rare. I am grateful these riders stepped up.

Most of the time, we never learn the fate of those riders who start on 600s. Some make it and simply never bother to tell their tales except to friends. Some wind up scaring themselves so badly (by getting out of control or by actually dumping the bike and injuring themselves) that they sell off and never ride again. These types can be found. Just troll the ads for new supersports with one owner and low miles. The worst of this class of riders are the ones who become "born again safety advocates". These riders who scare themselves out of riding occasionally become preachers that tell anyone who will listen that "motorcycles are dangerous and should be banned". What they don't tell those they are preaching to is how they got that way. It's bad enough having to deal with the general public (who are at least honestly unaware of what riding is about) but a lot worse to be sabotaged from within by someone who did it to themselves and got in over their head.

Then there is the last group of these "started on a 600cc sportbike" riders that never tell us their tales. They never do because they can't. Instead, they enjoying peaceful surroundings and occasional visits by bereaved family and friends. They made that one mistake, that one error that compounded into a tragedy of inexperience. They can never tell us what that error was so we can learn from it and maybe also tell us that they should have started on something smaller. They were successful right until the point their skills and luck ran out. This can happen to any of us on any bike. But, in the end, new riders on a powerful sportbike can be a recipe for disaster.

Be honest with yourself. Very honest. Take the advice and wisdom of others more experienced than you and consider what they are saying. They may have a point. But if you opt for that 600cc sportbike, be assured you will still be accepted as a rider and still encouraged to act as safely as possible at all times.

The Final Equation

We've covered the reasons why people justify or want to get a 600cc sportbike. But we have one more thing to answer and it is simple: What makes these bad bikes to start on?

Sportbikes are built as racing machines, pure and simple. They are built in response to guidelines laid down by racing bodies for a particular class and made to win races in that class. Ducati, for example, spends most of their existence building bikes to win races. Since 1950, Ducati was always a racing bike manufacturer first and their products reflected that philosophy. A by-product of winning races is the fact that people see those winning machines and want to ride them (if you're going to ride, you might as well ride the best as it goes). It didn't take the motorcycle manufacturers long to figure out that there was a market demand for these machines and reacted accordingly.

Sportbikes represent a technological arms race. This has really become apparent in the past 5-10 years where new models eclipse last years models with better performance and capability with each passing year. To compare a 1989 Honda CBR600F Hurricane (the original CBR) to a 2003 CBR600RR is pointless. There is no comparison except in the model designation showing a distant family relation. The new CBR is lighter by at least 50 pounds and packs 30 percent more power, handling and braking ability that makes the original CBR look like a ponderous dinosaur. But just because that original CBR dinosaur has been eclipsed doesn't make it any more tamable. If anything, older sportbikes are far more temperamental than the descendants.

Consider the fact that this year a privateer (independent racer) bought a Yamaha YZF-R1 off the showroom floor, took off the lights and mirrors, added a race belly pan, exhaust and tires and placed in the top ten at the AMA Superbike race at Daytona. The bike was two weeks off the floor and basically stock (the modifications with the exception of the pipe are required). Since factory sponsored teams tend to take the top slots, any privateer that can break in the top ten is doing well by anyone's definition.

Because sportbikes (and especially 600s since they compete in the most populous racing class out there) are designed first as racing machines, they are built with handling, acceleration and speed in mind. Not just one quality at the expense of others but all of them in abundance! Centralizing the mass of the bike at the center of gravity (CoG) gives the bike neutral stability. The high riding position and the perching of the rider over the CoG gives the bike the ability to flick over rapidly.

The steering geometry and short wheelbase of these bikes is designed to provide short and rapid directional changes. Combined with the higher CoG and mass centralization, the steering setup is what gives sportbikes their amazing turning ability.

Engine designs vary but have settled on V-twins and inline fours as the preferred choices. The sportbike V-twins are liquid-cooled, high-rpm engines designed to generate massive torque (hence acceleration) and power in the mid-range of their design limits. Witness the success of Nicky Hayden and Miquel Duhamel on the Honda RC51 in AMA Superbike as testament to the massive grunt these engines put out. So potent in fact that the AMA changed the rules for the following season to even the odds between the V-twins and inline fours. The inline four equipped bikes simply couldn't outpower the twins on curvy portions of the race circuit.

The inline four is by far the most common engine layout in sportbikes including all 600cc sport designs (the Ducati 620SS has a V-twin but is air-cooled and the bike is not a racing machine). All of the sportbikes that new riders lust after are equipped with this engine design. High-rpm capability (redlines vary between 11K and 16K rpm), liquid cooled and designed to produce peak power at very high rpms. The inline four delivers smooth and increasing power as the throttle is opened. Power tends to build to the peak point, at which power the engine will tend to surge to peak power and fall off as the peak point is crossed. Although nowhere near as bad as a race-tuned two-stroke (which literally double their horsepower as the engine transitions to peak power), the engine displays its roots as a racing thoroughbred.

A 1mm or 1/16 of an inch twist of the throttle can easily result in a 2000-4000rpm jump. You can be cruising along at a sedate 4000rpm, hit a pothole and suddenly find the bike surging forward with the front end getting light at 7000rpm. Definitely unnerving the first time you experience it.

And then there are the brakes. Braking technology has gotten progressively more potent over the past ten years. Even older sportbikes sport twin disc setups with two or four piston calipers designed to get these bikes down from 150mph to 60mph as quickly as possible. Current generation bikes are unreal. These brakes have grown to six piston calipers with massive discs whose sole job is to slow a 180mph missile down to corner speed in the shortest distance possible. If you ever watch racers, notice that they tend to only use two fingers to brake. They don't need anymore than that. The brakes are almost too powerful. And accidents happen on the track a lot due to bad or late braking.

All of these qualities produce an exquisite riding machine. The problem is, all of these qualities are designed to operate at extremes since it is under extreme conditions that these bikes are intended to operate. For the street, these capabilities are overkill. A hard squeeze of the front brake on the street can easily get a sportbike to lock its front wheel. Same applies to an over-aggressive stomp on the rear brake. No matter which way you slice it, highsides hurt.

The powerful engine can literally get you from 0 to 45mph in the blink of an eye in first gear. Come up one gear and you can be at 70mph with the slightest drop of your wrist. Add in one bump at speed without knowing what the throttle is going to do and suddenly you aren't at 70mph anymore. You're at 90+ mph and the bike is tickling its "sweet spot". At this speed, you better not panic. If you botch the slowdown from this error (either by a rapid rolloff or a shift), you can find yourself in serious trouble.

The handling capabilities of sportbikes actually make them wonderful machines to ride once you are used to thinking where you want to go. This actually gives them great beginner qualities (if on the extreme end). The downside is this perfect handling is slaved to amazing power on tap and the brakes that can back it off just as quickly.

In the final equation, a 600cc sportbike is little more than a racing machine with street parts bolted on. They aren't designed for street use; they are adapted to it. But no compromises are made in that transition. The same R6, GSX-R600, ZX-6RR or CBR600RR you can buy off the showroom floor can be converted in an afternoon, be at the track the next day and wind up winning races. And the sportbikes from 10 years ago were the R6s, Gixxers, Ninjas and CBRs of their day. They possessed the same qualities that their modern descendants do just not with the same maximums. Even today on the street, a 15 year old sportbike is little different than its 2003 cousin. The 2003 might accelerate quicker, stop shorter and lean farther but at the speeds us mortals ride at, there will be little difference.

Sportbike technology has gone an amazing distance in twenty years. Performance and ability has almost doubled in that time. But rider ability has not and a new rider from 20 years ago would still have the same challenges then as a new rider would today on an R6.

Sportbike form evolved to meets its function: to win races. Always has, always will. And riders will lust after these technological marvels for that reason. Can you start out on one? Yes. But you can also pretend to be a GP racer on a smaller sportbike that gives up nothing to its bigger brothers where most of us spend our riding days. It is always more satisfying to smoke a 600cc or 1000cc sportbike in the twisties on a Ninja 250 or GS500 than a bigger bike.

But when you are ready to answer the call of the Supersport, they will be waiting for you and you'll be better off having honed your skills on the smaller sportbike. Supersports are not beginner bikes. But they make great second and third bikes.

The choice is yours.

I disagree, SS isn't a beginer bike, but how do you learn to ride a sport bike riding anything else!! Its like learning to play rugby by playing football! And by the same token SS isnt a good beginer because you didn't learn to drive driving a ferari!

your compare'n apples to oranges... your not trying to learn to drive by riding a motorcyle


you start with the fundimentals... most start with practice... not a full blown game... and definatly not a D1 College game or the NFL...

even with your edit... your still missing the point... the point is to start small... you wouldn't start your 16y/o kid learning to drive in a Lambo... why would you learn on a SS?

I didn't get through the entire thing, but with me you are preaching to the choir. I've always wanted to get a 500 or 250 as my first bike because I want to learn and get comfortable riding before I start getting into the more expensive and speedy bikes.

It's like jumping in a Corvette as your first car, and driving 180 the first time on the highway. Before you're familiar with road conditions, how to turn and stop safely, etc. It's ridiculous.

What's worse are the people/dealers who will sell these hefty bikes to obvious beginners. I heard of one where the kid bought a 'busa and had to ask, "how do you start this thing?" A couple of weeks later he and his girlfriend were in the hospital after a crash (squids, too. Go figure).

Point being: I agree. And thank you.

Read ebbs! I not saying start on a ss, im saying not a crusier!! a 250 or 500 sporty!

where does it say start with a cruzer?

what you said is you didn't agree with the above... as far as I've read... it said start SMALL... a 250 or a 500...


you said, and what I was saying is you learn the fundimentals on something smaller then move up to the SS bike... you learn on the SS what is diffrent from the smaller bike...


Like I put in the first post... these aren't my words... I just thought it was a very well put explination to start small...

glad you agree... now get yourself a bike and ENJOY! :lol:

So ebbs, after reading all that, I guess I fucked up. Damnit. Whatever will I do now?

give your bike to me and start over.


fyi... I started on a SV650 (for about 700 or so miles) my ZZR is my first bike though

They were for me. So fuck you and that article. I turned out alright.

I bet Ebbs didn't even read all that.

There is an exception to every rule. As a general rule of thumb and in a perfect world, every rider would start on a small bike and work their way up.

Now does that always happen? No. I do know of some riders who have started out on 600cc or 1000cc sportbikes and became great riders. Of course being a MSF instructor, I also deal with at least two or three students every weekend who come to the class with a brand new "GSXR1000ZX10RR" as their first bike and have already wrecked it. Sometimes more then once.

I always tell students, would you buy your 16 year old child a twin turbo Dodge Viper for a first car? No? Then why would you want a "GSXR1000ZX10RR" for your first bike?

I really wish we had a stacked riding system like they do overseas. Where you have to have a 250cc for a year before you can move to a 500cc. Then you have to have that for a year before you can move up. I think that would prevent alot of accidents.

Sure the riders maturity level has alot to do with how well they learn on a sportbike. But if a rider gets into a panic situation and accidently rolls on the throttle in a corner on a 500cc bike, the bike is going to react alot differently then a 1000cc bike in that same situation.

Someonce once told me a 600cc sportbike wants to kill you. A 1000cc sportbike will try to kill you.

Tiered licensing FTW :dthumb:

You are absolutely correct about the maturity of the rider.

And, what I tell people... traffic is already out there trying to inadvertently kill you. Why help them?

Didn't through the "War and Peace" version, but I agree, I think. But there are exceptions (and I'm one of them)

I'm with ya. We need tiered licensing.

Where do I sign the petition?

If only it was that easy.

Ok, i miss interpreteed the thread then you miss interpreted me! I concider a 250 or 500 to still be a sport bike and was saying to start there rather than on a cruzier, its an argument ive had with many who try to say learn on a cruiser 1st! I apologize sir! It was the end of my shift and I was just trying to knock out a few last posts! should have read more of that long ass post!

Hey ebbs... on this forum.... me, fp, dlit, and many others...

So suck my balls.

Me too..

^Holla.

You all need to reliquish your bikes to me immediately and get on a two-fiddy....

I'm doing just fine on mine, thanks.

But if you have an aprilia rs250 I wouldn't mine taking it for a spin...

:lmao: It was worth a try.

Those are the BOMB!!! I'm just too freakin' tall for them... hell my daughter's too tall for it... still fun tho!

They sound nice for a 250, too :drool:

If you are going to use it purely for track duty, the height doesn't matter much though... you don't need to stop.

Hell, my r6 is a little too tall for me, I just dealt with it, street as well as track.

No. Other way around... I'm too tall for THEM. Meaning, when your feet fall asleep from riding *too long* it's a bad day. ;)

I'm 5'11"
my 13-year-old daughter is 5'8"

Oh I gotcha.... I read quickly. That makes sense... and you don't want to adjust your rearsets down so there really isn't an option... Hm.

They ARE sweet though.

Yeah I'm 5'8".

From now on, refer to CEO as a 13-year old little girl.

Stop insulting my daughter.



































Sorry, had to do it. :lmao:

You got me. I'm not very tall.

It's okay, little girl. You got good taste in bikes.

you could start wearing your heels on the weekdays.

I'll take it.
The tall clear plastic ones? You always liked those, didn't you, you naughty little bitch.

ya thems the ones.

I did actually... it was a good read... don't know if it'd have stopped me from buying my 600 first... but it's worth a shot

as am I

Fuck yeah we do

Hey Douchenozzle... my ZZr is my first bike too... I just thought it was a good read not saying it's the fuck'n bible...

No ebbs, take your beginner bible and go fuck yourself! Turd burgler.

There are always exceptions to the rules - I started with an FZR600...for a week. Then moved to a VFR800i and raced the FZR. But I wasn't a 19 year old squid...and I was modest with the throttle...but I'm the excpetion to most rules.

fuckin newbs

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/3013/busahx4.jpg

My friend who was teaching me the basics (shifting, placement of stuff, etc) was showing me on his bike, a CBR 1000. I wasn't going to ride it at all, but he wanted me to pull it up off the kick stand and OMG I damn near died.

I am WAY too small for a 1000. My ex's 600 wasn't as bad, but still not great. So, this lil girl is definitely sticking to a little 250 or 500 at the most for now.

Man, I wish the 70 was street legal :D


God, I'm such a pussy.

The 250's are sick now. The new ones anyway. My wife's gonna get one when I get back to the states (25 March). It'll be her first time riding anything on two wheels except for at the MSF course. She's starting out on a new bike. Mostly because the older 250s look like a 90 year old lady's crap. And she's 5'3", 105lbs.

Oh, the new Ninjas are so sexy I wanna lick 'em. But I'm a big believer in used shit first. 'Cause I know I'll likely lay the thing down at least once. Even if just trying to get on it and losing my balance (I do things like that on occasion :D )

I'd rather save my money for the new hotness once I'm more comfy (read: cocky). Even if it is going from an old 250 to a new one.

Better to be safe than sorry. I didn't do that and bought a new '04 r6 as a first bike with ZERO 2 wheel experience. Only went down once, haha.

is that only one drop or you actually went down once?

I went down once. I dropped it in my garage while I was changing out the stock brake lines for SS. I had it propped up as straight as possible by putting books under the stand (didn't have proper stands) and down she went. I've never said "FUCK" louder in my life. All the plastics were off at that point and my sliders took ALL the force. No marks or anything at all. Worked out good.

yeah I swear I caused an avalanch when I yelled out fuck when I had my flat and it fell over. bout gave the old man helping me a heart attack... even though I tried to be as calm as possible after he got in his van and left pretty damn quick. :lol:

When I went down, I was passing a car and couldn't slow down in time, so I went off the road and my front washed out and I went down. Didn't know enough. Knowing what I do now, I coulda mad it. So I get up and the people I just flew by asked me if I needed help. I said yeah. One of the guys palmed my exhaust to help me lift it. His hand-print was burnt onto my can for the rest of the time I owned the can. I got a slip-on during my insurance claim. I KNOW that motherfucker was crying the whole way home.

:lol: I'd have said in a calm voice... yeah that part is hot. :lol:

I've yet to go down actually riding... (nock on wood)

I almost was run off the road within 24 hrs of buying my bike... some mother fucker who was behind me... started to pass me after I moved out of his way... then moved from the fast all the way to the slow lane (3 lane road) with me next to him... I ended up slaming on my brakes and then putting a size 12 dent in his driver door... (btw... that was pretty stupid... it almost sent me into the ditch cause of the force of my kick :lol:)

My opinion, it would just make for more people riding illegaly.

I agree it should be done... but how to enforce it?

it'd be like insurance... you'd still have those riding with out it... but it would force most to comply.

It would be hard to force people to do this now. We haven't had one forever. There would have to be soooo many people under the grandfather clause, it wouldn't be right to enforce it. It'd be tough to implement a tieredlicense law in the states. Although, I agree that we should have one.

i think i have to disagree with the fast cars wont prepare you for bikes argument a bit here. while its true that the car has a far greater contact patch than the bike, the car also weighs about 7-9 times as much as your average SS bike. also, the camber angle on a cars tires is fixed which means that depending on the setup you are either comprimising your ability to accelerate and brake or the ability to corner. not so on a bike, bike tires are rounded and ought to have the same amount of contact straight up as it would leaned over. another point is that in driving a fast car in corners one has to be very aware of weight shift, let off the throttle mid corner in an FF or RR car and see what happens to you! shits just as important on a bike. and my last little bit here is on concentration, as one who has operated many many different types of vehicles i find the level nessesary to safely operate my bike about the same as what i use in one of my fast cars, or a plane, or when i was driving tanks.

btw, im basing this rant on my Shelby Daytona, and NSX. both of which are manuals and feature no traction control, abs, or any other form of driver assistance whatsoever as i believe that the driver should be what makes a car fast, not some computer

M&M, how tall are you? im assuming this was a newer cbr1000 and not one from the late 80s or 90s? modern litres really arent that much bigger than 600s

Good read maybe I should print it out for the guys at work

It'll take thousands of sheets of paper to print it out.

I believe an '05. And I'm 5'4. It wasn't the height so much as the width of it. I have to spread my legs further to fit around the bike, so there is less leg left to hang over onto the ground.

if you need help splittin your legs i'd be glad to stretch em out for ya. with sex.

real talk.

The fast car & fast bike discussion has more to do with performance and reaction. Honestly, can you say it doesn't take more skill to drive a Corvette ZO6 then a Chevy Cobalt? Maybe not in a straight line at 20 mph. But what about as speed comes into play. What about taking corners? What about a wet road?

As a new driver or rider you are not going to have those skills necessary to handle unexpected situations.

A new driver isn't going to know what to do when they floor it on a wet surface and the ass end of the car starts sliding. A new driver with 500hp under his butt isn't going to know how long it takes to slow down from 80mph to 0mph in a panic situation.

There are more oppertunities for error with a 16 or 17 year old getting a performance car or motorcycle. Just look at the 17 or 18 year old that was killed along with a few friends out hot rodding in his dad's M5 down in Ocala last month. Maturity level and skill level comes into play, with any kind of performance vehicle or motorcycle.

Ummm, have you ever taken an MSF class? Have you ever done any reading on Motorcycle basics or physics? If not, I encourage you to do both asap. When cornering on a motorcycle traction is reduced. Depending on the amount of lean angle, you have a smaller contact patch on the road. Have you ever watched any motorcycle racing? When they are leaned over in a corner, they are using maybe a fraction of the tires contact patch.

In a car, you have more contact path because the tires are turned. You don't turn on a motorcycle. You countersteer. A motorcycle turns nothing like a car.

Please do some research before you start giving people the wrong information.

Not true. I have an older (1990) CBR1000 and the seat height is at least 2 inches shorter than the 1000RR, and the seat padding is five times thicker. And even though it's 200 pounds heavier than an R6, it's a zillion times easier to ride on the street.

But the R1 is a race bike and should place well by a good rider. I'd like to see them take an R1 and make a great sport/tourer (not an FZ1).

Did anyone see the November, 2006 issue of Motorcyclist magazine? They took a mid-80's Kawasaki KZ550 LTD Cruiser and placed eighth in Middleweight Superbike. They paid $400 for the bike and $450 in parts from other old bikes.


Things don't change much. I remember thirty-six years ago when new riders thought they could learn on and ride Kawasaki 500 or 750 triples. Very unforgiving bikes for newies or experienced riders. Wheelies aren't something new. Me? I was on my friend's H1 once. Then I went back to my Hodaka Ace.

Funny, I've had so many girls say this to me.
Man, if you're going to speak in such a haughty fashion, you should at least be right. You're not. This post is ridden with inaccuracies.

Have YOU done any reading on motorcycle physics?

- The contact patch doesn't get much smaller when the bike is leaned over with the profile of today's tires... the traction is not decreased.

- Contact patch size depends on tire profile, lean angle, and how hard you are on the gas. And with today's tire profiles, at full lean there is still a very large contact patch.

- The reason turns are a problem is because the centripetal forces of cornering are trying to 'shear' the tire. When accelerating in a straight line, the forces of acceleration as well as gravity squat the tire onto the ground and there is TONS of friction. When in a turn you just have gravity and a very slight acceleration, and then the cornering forces are ripping at the tire in a sideways fashion. I.e. in layman's terms, you're close to sliding. Think about it, if a carboard box were coming toward you on the ground, would it be easier to stop it by pushing against it, or by moving out of the way and pushing against the side of the box to try to stop is via friction between your hands and the surface?

- In racing, how are they only using a 'portion of the contact patch'? The contact patch is the portion of the tire in contact with the ground. They're using 100% of it. This is true for normal riding too, not just racing.

- In a car, you don't have more contact patch because the tires are turned. You have more contact patch because the tires are wider and they are flat, and the cornering forces act to load those tires far more in the vertical direction than with a motorcycle, yielding large rectangular contact patches.

Hope this clears things up.

Ok, I apologize if I misworded my post. I know what I want to say and it doesn't always come out right by the time I type it.

First off I was trying to keep things simple and not start confusing people, esp new riders that may read this post. On "most" motorcycles, when you corner, traction is reduced because of the smaller contact patch that the tire has.

You have an oval tire () and take a corner, your contact patch is going to be smaller then if you are riding in a straight line. Plain and simple. I'm not refering to racing specifically. Just normal riding.

You are 100% correct on this: Contact patch size depends on tire profile, lean angle, and how hard you are on the gas. And with today's tire profiles, at full lean there is still a very large contact patch.

Quiz: My old Suzuki uses a 130 width rear tire. If I put on a 180 tire (and appropriate wheel, same tire compound, same pressure, etc.) will the contact patch with me just sitting on the bike change? Will it get bigger in area? Wider? Longer? Smaller? Will the handling get better, ie. easier to change direction?

:damn: Oh well I'll just use their paper

What is the aspect ratio(sidewall height)? If they are equal (say 55%) then the contact patch would get longer and wider. No it will not be easier to change direction. More tire touching the surface equals more friction.

That's what I always thought. But Archimedes proved us wrong over 2000 years ago. As the 130 tire is now, the contact patch is rectangular with the long dimension front to rear. With a 180 tire, the contact patch area will be the same according to Archimedes. The contact patch could now be rectangular with the long dimension left to right, or even square. Which is better for cornering traction? Long dimension front to back, or long dimension left to right? Which is better for accelerating out of the corner?

man look what i started, thanks to ceo :pwsign:

If you read my post after that, it wasn't about the height so much as how big the bike is in width. If you put 3 bikes next to each other, all with the seat the same height off the floor, but one is a 1000, ones a 600 and the other a 250, "you" will set on each differently. At least I did with all the ones I sat on. :idk:

right, but what NW is getting at is that you classified *all 1000s as being too wide for you. while it may not be a true 1000, im sure you wouldnt have any problems standing up my 954, its a pretty narrow bike behind the engine :dthumb:

Hmm, I see what you're saying. Didn't mean to generalize incorrectly. Remember, I am still new to this. The numbers are the size of the engines, yes? So wouldn't a 1000 pretty much be about the same size on every bike? The body and what not would be different, yes, but... Or am I completely off here?

:idk:

YOu can put 6 600's and they would each be different widths as well. The other important factor in being able to manage the bike (with shorter legs) is WHERE the weight is. I can tiptoe hold most bikes with one tiptoe down as long as the weight isn't up too high. When the weight is higher, I have to have more than one tiptoe down.

it's the INTERNAL size of the motor, not the external size. There are radical differences in height, width, weight between all motorcycles regardless of engine CC's

Okey dokey! :dthumb:

Until recently, the only seat I ever took was bitch. That always feels the same: f-in' uncomfortable!

I've only taken driver's seat on a few bikes, so I can only speak from experience about those. '05 cbr 1000, I can touch my tippy toes to the ground, but the weight of it was a little too much for me to manhandle with ease. An r6 (not sure what year), feet on the ground, but still not light enough to throw around. the pit bike in my pictures- PERFECT! :D

The point is: Like with driving, to me it isn't about how it looks or how fast it goes, but how comfortable I feel in control of it. I like vettes not because of their social status or price tag, but because it's the safest I've ever felt driving a car. The control i had was amazing, even at high speeds. Getting a bike will be the same, if I feel more comfortable on one particular 1k than I do on a 250, I'll buy the 1k hands down. I doubt that will happen, though, but we'll see. I don't want the temptation of too much power before I learn control.

A lot of times dealers will work great deals on big bikes that you could never get if you were actually wanting a litre bike.

A buddy of mine got a Ninja250 about 2-3 months ago. But he felt very unstable on it and didn't like going above 60mph on it. So he sold it and bought an 08 SV650s. Which I adviced him to get a used SV650 but he really wanted a full fairing bike. So he got it and he has improved greatly since he got it. Anyways he was waiting for his bike to come in for a month and the dealer offered him a SV1000 for an awesome price. He thought about it but I talked him out of it thankfully. He thought he'd be alright with the TQ(Other friends where trying to talk him into it) but I talked him out of it. I tried to get him to hop on the back of a Buddy's RC51 to demostrate what the TQ would be like. Either way a Newbie with a ton of TQ is no good.

Then another guy on a Georgia forum ended up with an R1 for his 1st bike. He wanted a R6(still powerful but better than a R1). But the asshole salesman said he'd get bored with the power of a 600 and he could get him a R1 for a little more than the 600. Which when we are searching for our first bike we'll take just about anything as long as it gets on on the road.

Luckily the kid is a smart kid and posted on the board after he got it and admited he felt he made a bad mistake and that hte bike scared him to death. Too bad for him he is still upside down on his payment but he's been riding very conservitly so he might be okay.

I started out on a POS 1994 Yamaha SecaII. Maybe 60hp and in a drag race would hang dead even with a stock 350z up to 90mph(THen it would leave me). Then moved to a 1996 Honda CBR600 F3 that I had to peice together and with my setup may have 95whp at the most under perfect conditions.

before i sold my ex-girlfriends buell blast, i would take it out routinely to charge it up and get the fluids movin....it was damned uncomfortable for my 6'0" tall frame, i'd end up sitting on the bitch seat and treating it like a chopper.....

My City Cross isn't all that accomodating for my height either, but i deal with it....as far as starting out with a beginner bike, my City Cross may have not been the most suitable bike to start off with, but I survived and have gotten use to it's low-end torque. I wouldn't trade my beginning experiences with it for anything....

Good post ebbs :dthumb: One of the guys on the mustang forum has an '05 CBR600RR as his first bike. He said he wouldn't have bought it if he'd known it would have so much power. Twofiddy's FTW! :rockwoot:

Update: My bike was a beginner bike :panic:

Yeah my Bike i believe was a perfect begginer bike. Its A 250 but has full farings and has the crotch rocket feel and look to it... i know the New ninja has that look to it but oh well... mine has a bunch of stuff the ninja doesnt like digital screen,larger tank,more low to mid range torque for quicker starts, and larger tires for more stability...i think i did good with my choice now i need to sell and get a 600 ive put 6500 miles on it and now i want something bigger... a CBR,R6,ZX6,F4i,Katana(dont really want to heavy)SV650 or similar. But i myself have been very grateful to have a 250 and not a 600 or 1000... because if i had a bigger bike i know i would be in the hospital there are so many times over the past couple of months that really could of ended baddly if i didnt have that 250... anyways i recommend that everyone should start on a 250...and yes there are some small exceptions but y take the risk just buy the best selling bike ever AKA ninja 250 and have a few fun months on it then sell it(its the best selling bike so you know your going to sell it dont worry) just think twice before you go and buy that 600 or 1000....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...000/lol250.jpg

My first street bike was a '70's two-stroke two-fiddy, made about 18-20 hp when you wrung it's neck. I then graduated to a 350 sized bike http://www.suzukicycles.org/photos/G...ed_CAN_500.jpg(380 Suz two-stroker, it made a whopping 32 hp at the crank....mebbe 25-6 at the rear wheel), which carried me over 70,000 miles over the next 3 yrs, over most of the lower 48 states. I raced it, toured on it and used it as my daily commuter. I'm not certain I have EVER needed more power than what that little Suz supplied. Don't get me wrong.....I LOOOOOOVVE hp, speed and quickness in a motorcycle. But riding an "underpowered" bike quickly teaches you the things you may never learn on something that scares the bejeepers out of you;

retaining cornerspeed, finding the true apex, picking a good line, braking properly, smoothness, grace and precision. Make a mistake on a HP bike and you can cover it with a twist of the throttle; be ham-fisted or sloppy on a "slow" bike and it shows up like a whore in a revival meeting.

JMHO

Sportbikes can be beginner bikes, it all depends on the rider...


.02 c

the origional post... though made by me was not written by me... but it's point wasn't saying Sportbikes can't be used as beginner bikes... several people, myself included, have proved that already...

it's point is saying they're not MADE TO BE BEGINNER BIKES...

I was born knowing how to ride.

This article is nonsense.

:lol: came out with a one piece on holding your helmet look'n for the bike huh

Nah, with how loose his mom is he rode out

Clever.

Where/when is your next track day?

Kyle you should do your riding blog about your track riding... give us some insight into some things you picked up over the season on the track... :idk:

That would hopefully be next season. And if you note, I never referenced being even close to as fast as you, so dont get too proud of your comeback chief.